Over the past year-and-a-half, 52 utility patents have issued that each cite more than 2,500 references. It turns out that the vast majority of those patents are owned by one company – Personalized Media Communications. PMC's recently issued patents also have the dubious honor of each having been filed prior to the 1995 change in patent term. Thus, PMC's patents will remain in force 17 years from the date of issuance even though they were filed more than 16 years ago.
The second major excessive citer is Pelikan Technologies. Pelikan's patents relate to diabetes diagnostic tools, including electronic lancing. The other companies with excessive citations of prior art include Abbott Diabetes, Aloft Media, Angiotech Pharma, and Bayer Healthcare.(I could not find any patents that issued from 2000 through 2009 that cited more than 2,500 references).
Assignee Name |
Patents on List |
References Cited (avg) |
Patent Documents Cited (avg) |
Non-Patent Literature Cited (avg) |
Example Patent |
Personalized Media Communications |
38 |
2,810 |
1,284 |
1,526 |
7966640 |
Pelikan Technologies |
9 |
3,239 |
3,239 |
0 |
7981056 |
Abbott Diabetes Care |
3 |
2,866 |
2,303 |
563 |
7920907 |
Bayer Healthcare |
1 |
2,510 |
1,005 |
1,505 |
7897623 |
Angiotech Pharmaceuticals |
1 |
3,068 |
245 |
2,823 |
7820193 |
Aloft Media |
1 |
3,255 |
3,006 |
249 |
7970722 |
Why do PMC's patents take so long to issue? First, lets talk about what did not happen: (1) PMC never needed to appeal an examiner rejection; (2) PMC never even received a final office action; and (3) the application was not held back because of a secrecy order. Rather, the problem seems to be that PMC filed too many applications in 1995. Since PMC was only a small company with a so many patent applications, the PTO decided that it should "coordinate" the examination of PMC's patents. The result appears to be simply that the PTO created excessive delay, including four PTO-initiated suspensions of prosecution and Office Actions penned by at least three different examiners.
In one case that I looked at, some of the key file-history entries include:
File Application with a preliminary amendment |
1995 |
Second Claim Set Amendment |
1996 |
Examination Suspended (At PTO's Request) to Consider the Plethora of PMC patents |
1997 |
First Non-Final Office Action Rejection |
1997 |
Third Claim Set Amendment |
1997 |
Second Non-Final Office Action Rejection |
1998 |
Fourth Claim Set Amendment |
1998 |
Fifth Claim Set Amendment |
1999 |
Sixth Claim Set Amendment |
2002 |
Third Non-Final Office Action Rejection (New Examiner) |
2002 |
Seventh Claim Set Amendment |
2002 |
Examination Suspended (At PTO's Request) to Consider the Plethora of PMC patents |
2004 |
PMC Filed Petition to Cancel Suspension and Speed-Up the Examination |
2005 |
Examination Suspended (At PTO's Request) to Consider the Plethora of PMC patent applications |
2007 |
Examination Suspended (At PTO's Request) to Consider the Plethora of PMC patent applications |
2008 |
Ex parte Quayle Action (With Proposed Amendment and New Examiner) |
2009 |
Notice of Allowance |
2010 |
Delay for additional Citation of References |
2010 |
Issue |
2011 |